Taking Pictures of Coins

The bulbs that show in Egry's picture are already old fashion LED and beyond now.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

As pointed out, many excellent threads on coin photography have been posted. I use axial photography, using a cheap led light from IKEA (€5); a nikon d3200 (second hand ~€100) and a Cosina macro lens (second hand ~€50).

I use the basic photo editing program of Windows ("photo's") for cropping and rotating and basic colour and contrast retouches until it looks 'as in hand'. Then, I combine the photo's using a free, easy online tool:
https://www.imgonline.com.ua/eng/combine-two-images-into-one.php

If the background is not nicely black (it usually is), I remove the background using a similar tool https://www.remove.bg/. It's free for low-ress downloads; high-ress is paid.

A couple of examples:










No background editing for these photo's: I use a very high aperture (f=22) with a very long exposure time (1.5 - 2.5 seconds). This is of course very much dependent on intensity of the light source.

 

Thanks for the info. Will look into if the lens works with IPhone 11.

 

Thanks for the link. I am more thank ok with a productive lecture, I will watch it this afternoon.

 

I would be happy with the quality Photos you are getting.

 

I have had a look at the website. I’m probably looking to achieve pictures with higher resolution. Also, the lighting seems unnatural as if it coming from a point directly above which then completely shades the rim, this may be caused by over cropping the edge.

In my opinion some of the others that have posted their images in this thread have a achieved a superior result.

I will explore past forums more diligently as that does seem to be a common theme here.

 

In the final analysis, nothing beats a camera, tripod and correct lighting.

DITTO ESP TRIPOD

 

I too have been looking into how to improve my coin photos. What I've been achieving with a cheap phone and flash has left little to be desired; to state the least.

I already possess a couple of digital point & shoot cameras and a tripod that will likely do the job OK. My primary need is the staging set-up and proper lighting.

One method that I've recently stumbled upon in the quest for photography methods is: 'Axial lighting' -- which I believe another poster already mentioned ITT. It seems like a better alternative than setting up some sort of light box.

It involves taking a pane of glass and pitching it an angle to direct light from a horizontal position straight down. This helps diffuse the light(cutting down on potential reflective glare). The light is directed evenly across the face of the coin. The picture is then taken through the glass pane with the camera directly above.

First, it prevents any shadow from the camera itself landing on the coin when lit from above. It also prevents potentially undesirable shadows along the edges of the devices that may be created by having the light(s) angled off to the side of the camera.

Here's a short article summing up the method:

https://www.diyphotography.net/use-mirrors-get-perfect-axial-lighting-macro-subjects/

Thing is, I can relate with the 'time' thing. I'm too busy spending my time researching and acquiring coins at the moment. Bettering my photos has yet to move to the front burner.

 

I have not played with axial since 2008 when I decided that it was less appropriate for most ancient coins than what the article above called 'shiney' ones. If anyone wants to try it, do note that the article points out the need for a longer than normal focal length lens. I use the same 100mm f/2.8 Canon shown in the article but when I moved from the crop camera to a full frame Canon I really wish I had bought the 180mm macro which would have given more space between camera and coin. Some of my best coin photos were taken before I bought the macro lens and I was using the 70-200mm zoom which did give better spacing. I never tried that lens with axial.

Anyone tempted to visit my old pages are warned that each was the record of where I was then and is not what I would recommend now. There are ideas to be gleaned from the pages but there is no 'How To' to be copied. I have lost control of my old pages so editing them is not likely to happen unless someone can help me with my FTP ignorance.

I would like to do a 2020 photo page but size limits online would erase any improvement in detail. When I try to upload a full image now, Coin Talk returns a 'too big' error. This has always been a problem. Twenty years ago I got complaints I was using too large photos and people with 14.4 modems did not like my site at all. I went back and reduced most pictures then but when more people had upgraded their equipment I started using larger photos again. For online purposes, the best cameras are overkill. If you like 20x30" wall hangings, the differences become clear. Lately, I have been reducing my images to 1620x1080 pixels which is still overkill but CT will accept them. That size makes good 4x6" prints but not the really large ones.

Another problem is that few of my coins really benefit from showing all their faults in super high definition. You might consider that also when deciding how far to go with all this. Below is my most recent purchase show in the light from a north facing window and reduced here from 3138 pixels tall to 1080. The coin has no details that require more than that so buying the equipment used was a choice rather than a requirement. Perhaps if your coins are the finest known you may make different choices. Here the feature was to select lighting direction that revealed the very weak legends as best was possible.

 

I'm under the impression that monitors have a resolution of only 72 dpi, but this may be old information. Are there many consumer computer monitors with higher resolution nowadays?

I usually reduce the resolution of any photograph that I take to 72 pixels/inch before I upload it to the internet. This reduces the file size significantly. But I also save a 300 dpi version in case I want to print it out.

 

On monitors and dpi/ppi, there are many with higher than 72 dpi nowadays.

E.g., in my current WFH set-up, my kitchen table is largely occupied by two monitors hanging off a laptop and desktop (either can drive one or both). One monitor is a 27" "Full HD" (1920x1080) monitor, so 81.59 ppi. The other is a 28" "4K" (3840x2160) model, so 157.35 ppi.

Laptop screens will have high ppi values and smartphones ridiculously high values - I'm typing this on an S20 Plus with a 525 ppi display.

To save a couple of calculations, there's a calculator here: https://www.sven.de/dpi/

ATB,
Aidan

 

So is there any consensus on the best p/i resolution for photos posted over the internet?

 

Watch the presentation I linked to above. It's all about getting decent pictures on the cheap. Point and shoot cameras, a tripod, desk lamps.

 

I think more important than the actual resolution is the size. The resolution becomes important if you are printing it, but most monitors are close enough that the resolution isn't significant.

However, compare the sizes of the pictures shown below. I've got them at 500x500, 720x720, 1080x1080, 1600x1600, and the original at 2088x2088. The first and last are too small and too big, but somewhere in the 1000-1500 range is the right size for showing the detail on most coins.

 

'Too big' wastes resources and will never be seen by most people who never will click to enlarge the photo as posted but the few that see something they want to investigate can do so if the file was 'too big'. On thelaptop I'm using right now the last four images in the psychics-fan set appear the same until their hidden details are released with a click. I can see why management and those people who are paying for bandwidth would rather have smaller photos but I enlarge and enjoy half a dozen or so images a day on Coin Talk when I see something that begs for a closer look. This site has quite a few really excellent coin photographers. We once had a 'contest' here where we tried to guess the owner of some coins but the person who was running it had to alter the images to remove characteristics that gave away the photographer. The photo hobbyists among us see things that mean nothing to most eyes. If this can be done without troubling the bandwidth measurers I'm happy with 'too big'. When we were on Coin Community, the largest allowable size was smaller than the standard I saved for all my collection so I had to make a special reduced version for use there. Fortunately they provided an on-site app that did this easily but it still cut down on posting pile-on replies. Whether that is good or bad is a matter of opinion.

 

Usually I combine the two sides of a coin before posting but I decided to try and see if the CT limit would take a single from the camera. The answer is no. This file was 4160 pixels wide out of camera but showed up on CT at 1920 pixels reduced by CT software without notice. When I tried uploading a joined pair, I got an error message so the limit is somewhere in this range. I was hoping to show the details needed for big prints. As is, click to see the reduction and note the red thread in the eye from the tray in which the coin was resting. Memo: dust coins before shooting.


Never being one to let well enough alone: the file was uploaded to Google drive and viewing allowed by anyone with the link. I do not know what it will look like or if all can view it but would appreciate hearing if anyone cares to look.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1lEOSDahR7L290NT2KRmWM62XSVloF_2m/view?usp=sharing
At this size, the depth of field at f/11 shows a difference between parts of the eye and nose. I avoid shooting smaller apertures than f/11 to avoid diffraction which lowers overall sharpness. Also, this was saved as a level 7 compression JPG so that may be limiting detail. I see more testing coming.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1fH4YwzkDtap0H__dnNWSWfKWprxyjoUI/view?usp=sharing
The above is the reverse as a level 12 JPG cropped to 4160 pixels square. The question is whether the much larger file size here added any noticeable detail compared to the compressed obverse. I believe this demonstrates 'overkill' but even this size only supports 300 ppi up to about 14" so, in theory, it would show 'problems' on a poster if you looked closely enough. What we have to ask is whether we need posters of our coins.

 

The climate where I live would be similar to northern Florida, I’m not sure how that would compare to Tennessee.

I store my coins in binders with 2x2s, in a container with a silica gel desiccant. Funny enough, my local expert has been trying to steer me away from the desiccant as he figures it causes a humidity vacuum therefore increasing the humidity in the container it’s stored in.

I am so eager to take them out of the 2x2s but have never had the confidence to do so. Maybe now that I have met this knowledgeable community I will be able to do so without fear.

What trays would you recommend? Are Abafil worth the money?

 

Thanks Doug, this is the type of information I was looking for.

Over the weekend I trialed lighting, as I tend to work long days, with active weekends with the kids, I need to find a solution that is independent of natural light as my only free time typically is at night once everyone has gone to bed. Of my trials, this very amateur looking lighting arrangement seemed to produce the best results.



However, it quickly became apparent that I need a better camera, which will most likely drive a more advanced lighting system. I’ll search past forums for advice on fit for purpose entry level camera equipment.

I have been researching the axial lighting technique mention in the thread. You mentioned that your trials weren’t very successful for ancients. Was there any specific aspect that it wasn’t achieving?

I’m looking to take high resolution pictures, not necessarily for sharing on chat forums but for my personal record system. If the resolution is downgraded when uploading online then I’m ok with that, as long as the original has the desired result.

 

@gsimonel Pixels per inch is only relevant for printing. It has nothing to do with display on a monitor.

 

Here is my $40 set up. The Morgan you see is on my desk top monitor and the actual coin is below on the flat under the microscope. May not be magazine quality but very good.